Jytte Klausen, Yale Dhimmiversity Press author, today in a Dutch newspaper:
Klausen vindt het geen principezaak. ‘Als er echt gevaar dreigde, zou ik vinden dat de cartoons uit het boek moeten. Ik ben geen Geert Wilders.’
Klausen does not think it is a matter of principe [to have the cartoons published]. "If there is a real danger, the cartoons should be removed from the book. I am not Geert Wilders."
No one needs to draw a picture to show that In this free speech fiasco at Yale, there's no free speech hero.
But with this latest retreat, we begin to get some almost comic relief. Klausen's concession to "real danger" completely undermines the thesis of her own book!
From the description at Yale University Press's website:
Jytte Klausen interviewed politicians in the Middle East, Muslim leaders in Europe, the Danish editors and cartoonists, and the Danish imam who started the controversy. Following the winding trail of protests across the world, she deconstructs the arguments and motives that drove the escalation of the increasingly globalized conflict.
And, having "deconstructed" everything:
She concludes that the Muslim reaction to the cartoons was not—as was commonly assumed—a spontaneous emotional reaction arising out of the clash of Western and Islamic civilizations. Rather it was orchestrated, first by those with vested interests in elections in Denmark and Egypt, and later by Islamic extremists seeking to destabilize governments in Pakistan, Lebanon, Libya, and Nigeria. Klausen shows how the cartoon crisis was, therefore, ultimately a political conflict rather than a colossal cultural misunderstanding.
Leaving aside the inadequate assessment of what was "commonly assumed" about Motoon Rage, the book's point seems clear: Klausen is arguing that the murder and mayhem and boycotts were merely overseas domestic politics in action, not umma-wide manifestations of Islamic rage, "orchestrated" or not, over a breach in sharia in Denmark. According to her own thesis, then, publishing the cartoons in an academic context should certainly not trigger -- what was it that "was commonly assumed"? -- anything resembling "a spontaneous emotional reaction arising out of the clash of Western and Islamic civilizations."
Oh, and next time, Klausen doesn't need to point out that she's not Geert Wilders. It shows.